Which mid-sized SUV $25k budget?

My sister-in-law's Xterra had a pretty noisy transmission at around 100k mileage. I believe hers was a 2005: http://www.carcomplaints.com/Nissan/Xterra/2005/

How about a slightly older 4runner? I love my 4th gen. Quite different from the 5th gen though. the 05+ are the ones to look at.

My wife has owned an '06 Xterra and put close to 80k on it (bought it used with 40k).

In that time we've replaced:

Transfer Case
Rear Axle
Timing Chain Guides
Driver side window motor and regulator

I'm not sure how much the previous owner played into item one and two because they went bad within the first 15k miles that we owned it. The transfer case ate everything in it and the rear axle developed a leak which resealing the diff didn't fix. Both were covered under warranty.

The chain guides went at about 100k and the motor/regulator wasn't a huge deal just a nuisance since its cold outside currently.

Overall I really like the SUV although I feel like it's a little gutless.

Another 4th Gen 4runner owner checking in. V8 Sport over here, but for what you're looking for the V6 will work just fine.

Great car. Designed and built around Toyota's peak.

Worth looking for a 4th generation with the xreas suspension?

Mazdax605 wrote: Worth looking for a 4th generation with the xreas suspension?

Make sure its not leaking.... I pulled all on mine out (still worked fine) but the parts are not cheap if you need to fix it.

I have the V6, Id get the V8 if I were doing it again (lift, bumper, camping stuff, bigger tires etc get me v8 gas mileage) but thats just me. It will tow (v6) 5k fine, but doesn't like it much IMO.

JohnRW1621 wrote: I don't want to seem like a hater but Durango and "Sienna-like reliability" seems like an unlikely combination

You're probably right on that. However I've owned 5 dodge trucks in my life and none of them were problematic. Of course they weren't as reliable as this sienna has been, but they never had any major problems that weren't caused by my younger self.

127k miles on my Cayenne Turbo S. So far pretty damn reliable. Tows 7700lbs and definitely puts the "Sport" in SUV...

What about an Acura MDX? I've driven a lot of SUV's and that was one of the very few that was actually enjoyable. I believe the 2007 and up have a 5k lb capacity.

Are the Durangos really that bad? I keep coming back to them as they seem cheaper than others in that segment. Haven't driven one yet, but look good on paper, and in pics. A guy I play hockey with has one, and loves it. His is a V6 with the knob transmission.

Also are they the same chassis as the Jeep Grand Cherokee? If so it seems everyone likes the JGC, but doesn't like the Durango. Is this similar to the magazines loving the Honda Passport, but hating the Isuzu Rodeo?

In reply to Mazdax605: AFAIK, the Durango and Grand Cherokee share a chassis platform, but they're not identical.

Looks like the Durango has a longer wheelbase (119.8" vs 114.8") than the GC, it's total length is longer (201" vs 191"), and it's a bit taller than the GC at 71-72" vs 68-69". The added size and height add weight too. The Durango ranges from 4756-5331lbs, while the GC is 4545-5104lbs.

Maybe the added size and weight are contributing to the difference in opinion we see and hear in reviews?

I don't know much about Durangoes (sp?) but it seems 1 of every 3 older than 5 years I see in central Ohio have the bottom of the tailgate rusted clean through.

I'd recommend an Xterra.

They're just as reliable as frontiers (which is quite. Just make sure the trans cooler in the rad doesn't fail).

Personally I'd call it the opposite of gutless, especially for it's class of vehicle. Pretty much the same as a current 4 runner anyways, and better than the Toyota's when it first came out in 2005.

In reply to Mazdax605:

I don't know much about the Grand Cherokee through that model year range. I do know that neither the Jeep nor the Durango are going to be anywhere near as reliable as your Toyota.

The Durango depreciates rapidly because it is a poorly made Mopar product without the magic of the Jeep nameplate. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

ShadowSix wrote: In reply to Mazdax605: I don't know much about the Grand Cherokee through that model year range. I do know that neither the Jeep nor the Durango are going to be anywhere near as reliable as your Toyota. The Durango depreciates rapidly because it is a poorly made Mopar product without the magic of the Jeep nameplate. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

I was wondering if you have personal experience with the poorly made Mopar without the magic of the Jeep nameplate? Or are you like so many others who just like to pile on. I'm not saying the Durango is great, heck I don't know a thing about it, but I've owned plenty of Mopar vehicles and had nothing bad happen to one of them. As a matter of fact my 92 dodge ram 250 Cummins may be one of the best vehicles I've ever owned.

Mazdax605 wrote: Worth looking for a 4th generation with the xreas suspension?

yes, definitely. Sport Edition all had it, and some Limiteds had it as well.

Mazdax605 wrote: Are the Durangos really that bad? I keep coming back to them as they seem cheaper than others in that segment. Haven't driven one yet, but look good on paper, and in pics. A guy I play hockey with has one, and loves it. His is a V6 with the knob transmission. Also are they the same chassis as the Jeep Grand Cherokee? If so it seems everyone likes the JGC, but doesn't like the Durango. Is this similar to the magazines loving the Honda Passport, but hating the Isuzu Rodeo?

I drove the new Durango a few years ago. They actually are great drivers (they are unibody, not body-on-frame, btw). Much more car-like than a 4Runner or Xterra or Sequioa. I keep thinking about one too, but the reliability thing always worries me as someonw who has had muliple bulletproof Toyota SUVs....

It's a small sample, but one of my coworkers has had a Cherokee and two Durangos (Durangi? Durangae?). None were reliable by Ford, let alone Toyota standards, but she keeps buying them. Masochism takes any forms...

For the GM DoD v8's its not like a lq# is expensive. and most make kits to get rid of DoD.

MrChaos wrote: For the GM DoD v8's its not like a lq# is expensive. and most make kits to get rid of DoD.

What is lq# ?

In reply to Mazdax605:

iron block ls aka lq4 or whatever the number is

I bought a Durango new. It was maintained at the Dealer, never went more than 4K miles on an oil change. The 60k service was done at 59,676 miles. At 60,404 miles it threw a rod. Chrysler said it was because of "sludge issues" and it was out of warranty.

That help explain the Durango hate? Sad part was it did everything I needed it to do, right up to that point

In reply to MDJeepGuy:

What year was your Durango? Do you remember which engine it had?

I'm a fan of these, but mid-sized is pushing but so is the Durango.

If its got to have a full frame, with 5k towing, but you dont want to pay the Toyota tax on the 4 Runner, your next best bet in my opinion is the Xterra. Actually its one of your only options, unless you go full size. I had this scenario last year. Bought the Xterra, dont regret it. Avoid the early years, and get into a 2010+. By then the radiator/trans cooler leak was fixed, and the timing chain guide wear issue was no longer relevant. Engine and trans are typically known to go well into high mileage without issue, assuming decent maintenance and lack of abuse. (aside from early year trans coolers killing transmissions). Gas mileage is kind of crap, but par for the course in this small market segment.

I bought a 2012 Pro4X with 50k some miles and have already pounded 20k on it with no issue. Haven't tried pulling 5k, but have pulled 3-3.5klb's recently and it does pretty well.